Fake News: Pope Francis Releases Official Message on “Snake-Tactics”

Booklet of Pope Francis’ World Communications Day message  (Vatican Media @Vatican Media)

Message of his Holiness Pope Francis
For World Communications Day
24 January 2018

“The truth will set you free” (Jn 8:32).
Fake news and journalism for peace

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Communication is part of God’s plan for us and an essential way to experience fellowship.  Made in the image and likeness of our Creator, we are able to express and share all that is true, good, and beautiful.  We are able to describe our own experiences and the world around us, and thus to create historical memory and the understanding of events.  But when we yield to our own pride and selfishness, we can also distort the way we use our ability to communicate.  This can be seen from the earliest times, in the biblical stories of Cain and Abel and the Tower of Babel (cf. Gen 4:4-16; 11:1-9).  The capacity to twist the truth is symptomatic of our condition, both as individuals and communities.  On the other hand, when we are faithful to God’s plan, communication becomes an effective expression of our responsible search for truth and our pursuit of goodness.

In today’s fast-changing world of communications and digital systems, we are witnessing the spread of what has come to be known as “fake news”.  This calls for reflection, which is why I have decided to return in this World Communications Day Message to the issue of truth, which was raised time and time again by my predecessors, beginning with Pope Paul VI, whose 1972 Message took as its theme: “Social Communications at the Service of Truth”.  In this way, I would like to contribute to our shared commitment to stemming the spread of fake news and to rediscovering the dignity of journalism and the personal responsibility of journalists to communicate the truth.

1.   What is “fake” about fake news?

The term “fake news” has been the object of great discussion and debate.  In general, it refers to the spreading of disinformation on line or in the traditional media.  It has to do with false information based on non-existent or distorted data meant to deceive and manipulate the reader.  Spreading fake news can serve to advance specific goals, influence political decisions, and serve economic interests.

The effectiveness of fake news is primarily due to its ability to mimic real news, to seem plausible.  Secondly, this false but believable news is “captious”, inasmuch as it grasps people’s attention by appealing to stereotypes and common social prejudices, and exploiting instantaneous emotions like anxiety, contempt, anger and frustration. The ability to spread such fake news often relies on a manipulative use of the social networks and the way they function.  Untrue stories can spread so quickly that even authoritative denials fail to contain the damage.

The difficulty of unmasking and eliminating fake news is due also to the fact that many people interact in homogeneous digital environments impervious to differing perspectives and opinions.  Disinformation thus thrives on the absence of healthy confrontation with other sources of information that could effectively challenge prejudices and generate constructive dialogue; instead, it risks turning people into unwilling accomplices in spreading biased and baseless ideas.  The tragedy of disinformation is that it discredits others, presenting them as enemies, to the point of demonizing them and fomenting conflict.  Fake news is a sign of intolerant and hypersensitive attitudes, and leads only to the spread of arrogance and hatred.  That is the end result of untruth.

2.   How can we recognize fake news?

None of us can feel exempted from the duty of countering these falsehoods.  This is no easy task, since disinformation is often based on deliberately evasive and subtly misleading rhetoric and at times the use of sophisticated psychological mechanisms.  Praiseworthy efforts are being made to create educational programmes aimed at helping people to interpret and assess information provided by the media, and teaching them to take an active part in unmasking falsehoods, rather than unwittingly contributing to the spread of disinformation.  Praiseworthy too are those institutional and legal initiatives aimed at developing regulations for curbing the phenomenon, to say nothing of the work being done by tech and media companies in coming up with new criteria for verifying the personal identities concealed behind millions of digital profiles.

Yet preventing and identifying the way disinformation works also calls for a profound and careful process of discernment.  We need to unmask what could be called the “snake-tactics” used by those who disguise themselves in order to strike at any time and place.  This was the strategy employed by the “crafty serpent” in the Book of Genesis, who, at the dawn of humanity, created the first fake news (cf. Gen 3:1-15), which began the tragic history of human sin, beginning with the first fratricide (cf. Gen 4) and issuing in the countless other evils committed against God, neighbour, society and creation.  The strategy of this skilled “Father of Lies” (Jn 8:44) is precisely mimicry, that sly and dangerous form of seduction that worms its way into the heart with false and alluring arguments.

In the account of the first sin, the tempter approaches the woman by pretending to be her friend, concerned only for her welfare, and begins by saying something only partly true: “Did God really say you were not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?” (Gen 3:1).  In fact, God never told Adam not to eat from any tree, but only from the one tree: “Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you are not to eat” (Gen 2:17).  The woman corrects the serpent, but lets herself be taken in by his provocation: “Of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden God said, “You must not eat it nor touch it, under pain of death” (Gen 3:2).  Her answer is couched in legalistic and negative terms; after listening to the deceiver and letting herself be taken in by his version of the facts, the woman is misled.  So she heeds his words of reassurance: “You will not die!” (Gen 3:4).

The tempter’s “deconstruction” then takes on an appearance of truth: “God knows that on the day you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil” (Gen 3:5).  God’s paternal command, meant for their good, is discredited by the seductive enticement of the enemy: “The woman saw that the tree was good to eat and pleasing to the eye and desirable” (Gen 3:6).  This biblical episode brings to light an essential element for our reflection: there is no such thing as harmless disinformation; on the contrary, trusting in falsehood can have dire consequences. Even a seemingly slight distortion of the truth can have dangerous effects.

What is at stake is our greed.  Fake news often goes viral, spreading so fast that it is hard to stop, not because of the sense of sharing that inspires the social media, but because it appeals to the insatiable greed so easily aroused in human beings.  The economic and manipulative aims that feed disinformation are rooted in a thirst for power, a desire to possess and enjoy, which ultimately makes us victims of something much more tragic: the deceptive power of evil that moves from one lie to another in order to rob us of our interior freedom.  That is why education for truth means teaching people how to discern, evaluate and understand our deepest desires and inclinations, lest we lose sight of what is good and yield to every temptation.

3.   “The truth will set you free” (Jn 8:32)

Constant contamination by deceptive language can end up darkening our interior life.  Dostoevsky’s observation is illuminating: “People who lie to themselves and listen to their own lie come to such a pass that they cannot distinguish the truth within them, or around them, and so lose all respect for themselves and for others.  And having no respect, they cease to love, and in order to occupy and distract themselves without love they give way to passions and to coarse pleasures, and sink to bestiality in their vices, all from continual lying to others and to themselves.” (The Brothers Karamazov, II, 2).

So how do we defend ourselves?  The most radical antidote to the virus of falsehood is purification by the truth.  In Christianity, truth is not just a conceptual reality that regards how we judge things, defining them as true or false.  The truth is not just bringing to light things that are concealed, “revealing reality”, as the ancient Greek term aletheia (from a-lethès, “not hidden”) might lead us to believe.  Truth involves our whole life.  In the Bible, it carries with it the sense of support, solidity, and trust, as implied by the root ‘aman, the source of our liturgical expression Amen.  Truth is something you can lean on, so as not to fall.  In this relational sense, the only truly reliable and trustworthy One – the One on whom we can count – is the living God.  Hence, Jesus can say: “I am the truth” (Jn 14:6).  We discover and rediscover the truth when we experience it within ourselves in the loyalty and trustworthiness of the One who loves us.  This alone can liberate us: “The truth will set you free” (Jn 8:32).

Freedom from falsehood and the search for relationship: these two ingredients cannot be lacking if our words and gestures are to be true, authentic, and trustworthy.  To discern the truth, we need to discern everything that encourages communion and promotes goodness from whatever instead tends to isolate, divide, and oppose.  Truth, therefore, is not really grasped when it is imposed from without as something impersonal, but only when it flows from free relationships between persons, from listening to one another.  Nor can we ever stop seeking the truth, because falsehood can always creep in, even when we state things that are true.  An impeccable argument can indeed rest on undeniable facts, but if it is used to hurt another and to discredit that person in the eyes of others, however correct it may appear, it is not truthful.  We can recognize the truth of statements from their fruits: whether they provoke quarrels, foment division, encourage resignation; or, on the other hand, they promote informed and mature reflection leading to constructive dialogue and fruitful results.

4.   Peace is the true news

The best antidotes to falsehoods are not strategies, but people: people who are not greedy but ready to listen, people who make the effort to engage in sincere dialogue so that the truth can emerge; people who are attracted by goodness and take responsibility for how they use language.  If responsibility is the answer to the spread of fake news, then a weighty responsibility rests on the shoulders of those whose job is to provide information, namely, journalists, the protectors of news.  In today’s world, theirs is, in every sense, not just a job; it is a mission.  Amid feeding frenzies and the mad rush for a scoop, they must remember that the heart of information is not the speed with which it is reported or its audience impact, but persons.  Informing others means forming others; it means being in touch with people’s lives.  That is why ensuring the accuracy of sources and protecting communication are real means of promoting goodness, generating trust, and opening the way to communion and peace.

I would like, then, to invite everyone to promote a journalism of peace.  By that, I do not mean the saccharine kind of journalism that refuses to acknowledge the existence of serious problems or smacks of sentimentalism.  On the contrary, I mean a journalism that is truthful and opposed to falsehoods, rhetorical slogans, and sensational headlines.  A journalism created by people for people, one that is at the service of all, especially those – and they are the majority in our world – who have no voice.  A journalism less concentrated on breaking news than on exploring the underlying causes of conflicts, in order to promote deeper understanding and contribute to their resolution by setting in place virtuous processes.  A journalism committed to pointing out alternatives to the escalation of shouting matches and verbal violence.

To this end, drawing inspiration from a Franciscan prayer, we might turn to the Truth in person:

Lord, make us instruments of your peace.
Help us to recognize the evil latent in a communication that does not build communion.
Help us to remove the venom from our judgements.
Help us to speak about others as our brothers and sisters.
You are faithful and trustworthy; may our words be seeds of goodness for the world:
where there is shouting, let us practise listening;
where there is confusion, let us inspire harmony;
where there is ambiguity, let us bring clarity;
where there is exclusion, let us offer solidarity;
where there is sensationalism, let us use sobriety;
where there is superficiality, let us raise real questions;
where there is prejudice, let us awaken trust;
where there is hostility, let us bring respect;
where there is falsehood, let us bring truth.
Amen.

Vatican, 24 January 2018

Cryin’ Chuck Schumer: Twitter Funnies

North Korea to mark Army Founding Day February 8, Day Before  PyeongChang Olympics, South Korea Announces

Photos are a sampling of past military parades released by KCNA.

2018/01/23

SEOUL, Jan. 23 (Yonhap) — North Korea said Tuesday that it has designated Feb. 8 as the new founding anniversary of its army and will prepare “practical” steps to mark the “historic” occasion, which will come one day before South Korea opens the Winter Olympic Games.

The Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said in a report monitored in Seoul that it has changed the anniversary date of the establishment of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), which previously fell on April 25.

“Feb. 8 will be marked as the Army-Building Day,” the KCNA said. “The Cabinet and other relevant organs will take practical steps to significantly mark the founding anniversary of the Korean People’s Army.”

The KCNA didn’t provide details on what steps will be taken. It has been reported that the North might be preparing a large-scale military parade that will require mobilization of troops and diverse weaponry.

A South Korean government official said earlier that the mobilization of around 13,000 troops and some 200 pieces of equipment have been detected near an airport in Pyongyang for what appears to be a rehearsal for a military parade.

During a Saturday parade commemorating its founder’s birthday, North Korea rolled out what appeared to be new intercontinental ballistic missiles. The country has been warned against having such weapons.

The KCNA, meanwhile, said that the North will mark April 25 as the anniversary of late leader Kim Il-sung’s establishment of the “Korean People’s Revolutionary Army,” which is considered to be a prototype for its KPA.

The new Army-Building Day is just one day before South Korea is to host the Winter Olympics in its eastern town of PyeongChang. The North plans to join the Feb. 9-25 sporting event by sending athletes, an art troupe and officials.

North Korea’s advance team wrapped up its two day stay in South Korea on Monday, after inspecting performance venues. South Korea will send its own inspection team to the North on Tuesday to inspect the venues where the two Koreas will hold joint cultural and sports events.

 

NORTH KOREA’S ANNOUNCEMENT IN STATE MEDIA:

Pyongyang, January 23 (KCNA) — The Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Workers’ Party of Korea on Monday announced the decision to mark February 8 as the founding anniversary of the Korean People’s Army (KPA).

According to the decision, Feb. 8, Juche 37 (1948) is a historic day when the Korean People’s Revolutionary Army developed into the regular revolutionary armed forces to declare the birth of the KPA.

Considering the foundation of a strong regular army to be essential for the building of an independent and sovereign state after the liberation of the country, President Kim Il Sung founded the KPA, the Juche-type revolutionary regular armed forces, which inherited the anti-Japanese tradition, in a span of less than three years with his outstanding idea of army-building and energetic leadership.

The Political Bureau of the C.C., the WPK decided as follows to add luster to the revolutionary feats of the President, the founder and builder of the heroic KPA:

February 8, Juche 37 (1948) when the great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung developed the Korean People’s Revolutionary Army into the regular revolutionary armed forces will be marked as the founding anniversary of the KPA.

In this regard, April 25, Juche 21 (1932) when he founded the first revolutionary armed forces will be marked as the founding anniversary of the Korean People’s Revolutionary Army.

February 8 will be marked as the Army-Building Day.

The Party organizations at all levels will conduct politico-ideological education and significantly hold diverse events for making the service personnel, Party members and other working people deeply grasp the feats of the great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung for building of the regular revolutionary armed forces on the occasion of Feb. 8 every year.

The Cabinet and other relevant organs will take practical steps to significantly mark the founding anniversary of the Korean People’s Army. –

Russian Cadets in Trouble for Dancing in Underwear in This Video

The video, showing a group of first-year students dancing provocatively along to Satisfaction by Benny Benassi at the Ulyanovsk Institute of Civil Aviation, has been viewed more than five million times on Russian social media network VKontakte.

School authorities threatened expulsion, but social media users so enthusiastically supported the fun video that the cadets are going to be given a pass.

In response to the support for the cadets the Governor of the Ulyanovsk region declared – and posted on Facebook, – that expelling the students would not “add to their patriotism or upbringing”, and said he will meet with the young men and their parents to discuss the issue.

British Army Soldiers posted a similar video in 2015, but it is not known whether this was the inspiration.

Russia’s “It Girl” is a Presidential “Anti-Establishment” Candidate

MOSCOW, January 22. /TASS/. Activists from TV host Ksenia Sobchak’s election headquarters have collected more than 101,000 signatures in her support, edging past the needed 100,000, according to a counter at Sobchak’s election website.

Sobchak is running for the Russian presidency as a nominee from the Civil Initiative party. Candidates from non-parliamentary parties have to collect at least 100,000 signatures for the election and file no more than 105,000 with the Central Election Commission (CEC).

According to the site’s counter, 101,008 signatures have been collected to date. The CEC will be receiving signatures and documents for the registration until 18:00 Moscow time January 31. Sixty thousand signatures in support of each candidate will be subject to review by the CEC.

TV personality and socialite Ksenia Sobchak announced plans to run for president of Russia in 2018. Sobchak, 35, is the daughter of late Anatoly Sobchak, the first democratically elected mayor of St. Petersburg who was once a political mentor to Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

The presidential election in Russia will take place on March 18, 2018.

FILE – In this Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2012 file photo Russian socialite and TV host Kseniya Sobchak, daughter of the late St. Petersburg mayor, Anatoly Sobchak, takes a photo of journalists during her interview in the Echo Moskvy (Echo of Moscow) radio station in Moscow, Russia. “I’m Ksenia Sobchak, and I’ve got something to lose. But I’m here.” This is what the blond socialite and TV personality said when she began her unlikely foray into political activism by taking the stage at a huge anti-Putin rally in December. Once considered untouchable because of her family’s close personal ties to President Vladimir Putin, Sobchak has since found that she does indeed have something to lose, as her apartment has been raided by police and she has been called in for interrogation. It has been a quick change of fortune for Russia’s It Girl, who like many Russians of her generation experienced a civic awakening after many years of political passivity. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko, file)
Russian socialite and TV host Kseniya Sobchak, center, daughter of the late St. Petersburg mayor, Anatoly Sobchak, and State Duma deputy Ilya Ponomarev, second left, walk with protesters in downtown Moscow, late Tuesday, May 8, 2012 a day after Putin’s inauguration. Vladimir Putin took the oath of office in a brief but regal Kremlin ceremony on Monday, while on the streets outside thousands of helmeted riot police prevented hundreds of demonstrators from protesting his return to the presidency. (AP Photo/Sergey Ponomarev)
Russian reality television star and socialite Kseniya Sobchak, left, and Russian film director and actor Ivan Okhlobystin arrive at the f MuzTV Awards ceremony, in Moscow, Friday, June 3, 2011. (AP Photo/Mikhail Metzel)
ITAR-TASS 63: MOSCOW, RUSSIA. MARCH 14. TV personality Ksenia Sobchak in pink outfit with poodles on the set of Circus With Celebs Show (Tsirk So Zvyozdami) broadcast on Russia’s Channel One. (Photo ITAR-TASS / Ruslan Roshchupkin)

ITAR-TASS 10: MOSCOW, RUSSIA. FEBRUARY 8. TV host and socialite Ksenia Sobchak poses for the press in the shopping centre European at the Russian premiere of William Heins comedy Pledge This! starring Paris Hilton. Ksenia Sobchak is the voice of Paris Hilton in the comedy released in Russia under the title Blonde in Chocolate. (Photo ITAR-TASS / Vitaly Belousov)

MOSCOW, RUSSIA. NOVEMBER 29, 2014. TV presenter Ksenia Sobchak at the opening of the GUM Skating Rink in Moscow’s Red Square. Ilya Pitalev/TASS

MOSCOW, RUSSIA. MARCH 3, 2015. Actress Anna Ukolova (L) as bride Agafya and TV presenter Ksenia Sobchak as matchmaker Fyokla Ivanovna perform in a scene from Nikolai Gogol’s play The Marriage staged by Filipp Grigoryan at the Theatre of Nations in Moscow. Mikhail Japaridze/TASS

ITAR-TASS 04: MOSCOW, RUSSIA. NOVEMBER 20, 2009. TV presenter Kseniya Sobchak attends the Glamour Women of the Year awards ceremony. (Photo ITAR-TASS / Maxim Shemetov)

ITAR-TASS 36: MOSCOW, RUSSIA. JANUARY 22, 2010. Socialite Kseniya Sobchak and dancer Yevgeny Papunaishvili dancing during the shooting of the show ‘Dances With Stars: 2010 Season’ for the Rossiya TV Channel. This is a Russian version of the BBC’s ‘Strictly Come Dancing’. (Photo ITAR-TASS / Alexei Ladygin)

Photo courtesy Valery Sharfulin for TASS

 

Feinstein, Schiff Request Twitter & Facebook Conduct Investigation of Russian Bot Activity in #ReleaseTheMemo Campaign

UPDATE: Read below for a second letter dated Jan 31 2018
———————————-
 Jan 23 2018

Washington – Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Congressman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee sent a letter today to Twitter’s CEO Jack Dorsey and Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg. In the letter, Feinstein and Schiff request that Twitter and Facebook immediately conduct an in-depth forensic examination of the reported actions by Russian bots and trolls surrounding the #ReleaseTheMemo online campaign and how users were exposed to this campaign as a result of Russian efforts. According to the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy, this effort gained the instant attention and assistance of social media accounts linked to Russian influence operations.

In the letter, Feinstein and Schiff write: “If these reports are accurate, we are witnessing an ongoing attack by the Russian government through Kremlin-linked social media actors directly acting to intervene and influence our democratic process. This should be disconcerting to all Americans, but especially your companies as, once again, it appears the vast majority of their efforts are concentrated on your platforms. This latest example of Russian interference is in keeping with Moscow’s concerted, covert, and continuing campaign to manipulate American public opinion and erode trust in our law enforcement and intelligence institutions.”

The full letter is below:

Dear Mr. Dorsey and Mr. Zuckerberg:

We seek your companies’ urgent assistance. Public reports indicate that accounts linked to the Russian government are again exploiting Twitter and Facebook platforms in an effort to manipulate public opinion. These recent Russian efforts are intended to influence congressional action and undermine Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, which has already resulted in the indictments of two Trump campaign officials and guilty pleas from two others, who are both now cooperating with prosecutors.  It is critically important that the Special Counsel’s investigation be allowed to proceed without interference from inside or outside the United States. That is why we seek your assistance in our efforts to counter Russia’s continuing efforts to manipulate public opinion and undermine American democracy and the rule of law.

Specifically, on Thursday, January 18, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Majority voted to allow Members of the U.S. House of Representatives to review a misleading talking points “memo” authored by Republican staff that selectively references and distorts highly classified information.  The rushed decision to make this document available to the full House of Representatives was followed quickly by calls from some quarters to release the document to the public.

Several Twitter hashtags, including #ReleaseTheMemo, calling for release of these talking points attacking the Mueller investigation were born in the hours after the Committee vote. According to the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy, this effort gained the immediate attention and assistance of social media accounts linked to Russian influence operations. By Friday, January 19, 2018, the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag was “the top trending hashtag among Twitter accounts believed to be operated by Kremlin-linked groups.” Its use had “increased by 286,700 percent” and was being used “100 times more than any other hashtag” by accounts linked to Russian influence campaigns. These accounts are also promoting an offer by WikiLeaks to pay up to $1 million to anyone who leaks this classified partisan memo.

If these reports are accurate, we are witnessing an ongoing attack by the Russian government through Kremlin-linked social media actors directly acting to intervene and influence our democratic process. This should be disconcerting to all Americans, but especially your companies as, once again, it appears the vast majority of their efforts are concentrated on your platforms. This latest example of Russian interference is in keeping with Moscow’s concerted, covert, and continuing campaign to manipulate American public opinion and erode trust in our law enforcement and intelligence institutions.

We understand Facebook and Twitter have developed significant expertise in identifying inauthentic and malicious accounts.  Further, your forensic investigations into Russian government exploitation of your platforms during the 2016 U.S. election have helped expose to the American public the vast extent of Russia’s covert influence efforts. We therefore request that your companies conduct an in-depth forensic examination of this real-time activity on your platforms to determine:

  • Whether and how many accounts linked to Russian influence operations are involved in this campaign;
  • The frequency and volume of their postings on this topic; and
  • How many legitimate Twitter and Facebook account holders have been exposed to this campaign.

Given the urgency of this matter, we ask that you provide a public report to Congress and the American public by January 26, 2018.  In addition, we urge your companies to immediately take necessary steps to expose and deactivate accounts involved in this influence operation that violate your respective user policies.

Sincerely,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senate

Adam Schiff
United States House of Representatives

###

UPDATE: Feinstein, Schiff Send Follow Up Letter to Twitter and Facebook on #ReleaseTheMemo Campaign

Washington — Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, today sent a follow up letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg after the companies provided an incomplete response to their initial questions about the online #ReleaseTheMemo campaign. Late last week, Facebook and Twitter responded to Feinstein and Schiff’s initial letter — those responses can be found here and here).

In the initial letter, Feinstein and Schiff requested that Twitter and Facebook immediately conduct an in-depth forensic examination of the reported actions by Russian bots and trolls surrounding the #ReleaseTheMemo online campaign and how users were exposed to this campaign as a result of Russian efforts.  According to the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy, this effort gained the instant attention and assistance of social media accounts linked to Russian influence operations. In this follow up letter, Feinstein and Schiff asked additional questions of Facebook and Twitter, and provided additional information to follow up on for the requested analysis.

Feinstein and Schiff write in this follow up letter: “Although we are encouraged by your companies’ continued willingness to work with Congress to raise awareness about potential abuse of your platforms by agents of foreign influence, your replies have raised more questions than they have answered.

“It is unclear from your responses whether you believe any of the Russian-linked accounts involved in this influence campaign violated your respective user policies,” the leaders wrote. “We reiterate our request that you immediately take necessary steps to expose and deactivate such accounts if you determine that they violate your respective user policies.  We ask that you notify users who may have seen these foreign influence postings, and provide us with a description of proactive steps your companies are taking to identify, prevent, and thwart such foreign influence campaigns on your platforms in the future.”

Full letter is below – to see a PDF version click here:

January 31, 2018

Jack Dorsey
Chief Executive Officer
Twitter, Inc.
1355 Market Street
Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94103

Mark Zuckerberg
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Facebook Inc.
1 Hacker Way
Menlo Park, CA 94025

Dear Mr. Dorsey and Mr. Zuckerberg:

We appreciate your companies’ respective responses on January 26, 2018 to our joint letter dated January 22, 2018 seeking assistance to understand the role and extent of Russian-affiliated social media accounts involved in promoting the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag. Although we are encouraged by your companies’ continued willingness to work with Congress to raise awareness about potential abuse of your platforms by agents of foreign influence, your replies have raised more questions than they have answered.

It is unclear from your responses whether you believe any of the Russian-linked accounts involved in this influence campaign violated your respective user policies.  We reiterate our request that you immediately take necessary steps to expose and deactivate such accounts if you determine that they violate your respective user policies.  We ask that you notify users who may have seen these foreign influence postings, and provide us with a description of proactive steps your companies are taking to identify, prevent, and thwart such foreign influence campaigns on your platforms in the future.

The response from Facebook fails to indicate whether the company has conducted any analysis of the issue we raised concerning possible Russian-affiliated attempts to amplify calls to release a misleading, classified memo written by Republican staff on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (an online effort we will refer to broadly as the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign). And as more fully described below, Twitter inexplicably confined its response to “original content” and neglected to answer the question of whether Russian sources were actively engaged in promoting the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag, as illuminated by the Hamilton 68 dashboard of the German Marshall Fund.

As that dashboard made clear in the findings we asked you to investigate: “Content is not necessarily produced or created by Russian government operatives, although that is sometimes the case. Instead, the network often opportunistically amplifies content created by third parties not directly linked to Russia.” By failing to address whether Russian-tied online accounts on Twitter or Facebook were – or still are – amplifying the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign and related messaging, we are no closer to understanding Russia’s continuing interference in our democratic affairs.

On January 19, 2018, Twitter transmitted to Congress an update to its retrospective review of Russian activity on its platform and identified an additional 1,062 accounts connected to Russia that attempted to influence an American election that took place well over a year ago. We cannot wait another year to learn how Kremlin-linked trolls and bots are currently exploiting your platforms to influence debates going on in Congress today.

It is our belief that the core questions raised in our first letter remain largely unaddressed:

  • whether and how many accounts linked to Russian influence operations were involved in the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign;
  • the frequency and volume of their postings on this topic; and
  • how many legitimate Twitter and Facebook account holders have been exposed to this campaign.

We remain gravely concerned about any foreign attempts to undermine or discredit the ongoing inquiries by Congressional committees and Special Counsel Mueller into Russian active measures during the 2016 U.S elections. To that end, we are submitting a series of new questions stemming from our original request about any pro-Russian or Kremlin-linked efforts to promote the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign – whether through original content generation orthrough content amplification via automated, false, or “troll” accounts.

Although some of these questions and requests may appear more relevant to one platform or the other, we ask that your companies nonetheless provide responses with any information, data, or context that is relevant to our underlying concern: that Moscow has persevered undeterred in its attempts to manipulate or exploit social media conversations on politically divisive topics. As the 2018 election season begins in earnest, we cannot allow Russia or any other outside power to manipulate U.S. public opinion or degrade Americans’ trust in the authenticity of domestic political and policy debates.

We therefore ask that you provide responses to the following:

  1. To the extent possible, please explain the analysis undertaken to assess the role that Kremlin-affiliated or -directed Twitter or Facebook accounts played in the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign online.  Please provide relevant specific data for posts on your platform that referenced the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign and related messaging, including the volume of posts of original content versus reposts, and a geographical breakdown of original posts versus reposts.
  2. Were these analyses limited only to those users previously identified as affiliated with the Russian Internet Research Agency (IRA) troll farm? Did your companies look at other Russian-linked online operatives or propagandists, including trolls, automated accounts, and “botnets?”
  3. What types of “geographic data,” did your companies rely on, if any, to analyze potential Russian involvement in the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign? For instance, in its responses to Questions for the Record dated January 15, 2018 to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Twitter wrote that “there are technological limits to what we can determine based on the information we can detect regarding a user’s origin.” In this instance, did your companies’ analyses take into account IP addresses, users’ self-identified locations, or other data points? Did a focus on a limited set of geographic indicators for identifying Russian-affiliated users involved in the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign circumscribe the universe of social media accounts you examined? For instance, were accounts with European indicators included in your analyses?
  4. Did your companies’ analyses focus solely on those accounts responsible for producing “original content” tied to the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign? Or did those analyses fully account for any efforts by online Russian-linked operatives or propagandists to re-share, retweet, or otherwise amplify the hashtag and related content – even if those social media accounts did not create the “original content?”
  5. Did your companies identify any #ReleaseTheMemo-related content or discussion linked to Russian-affiliated accounts “jumping” or otherwise moving across your platforms? For instance, we know during the 2016 election that similar IRA-generated socially divisive content and messaging appeared on both of your platforms. Was any comparable analysis conducted in this case?
  6. A recent media report suggested that more than 1,000 new Twitter accounts that were created between Thursday, January 18 and Sunday, January 21 combined to tweet or retweet the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag almost 5,000 times. That report also found “about 200 of the accounts had only sent four or fewer tweets by Sunday night, with at least one featuring the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag.” Did any of these accounts suggest linkages to Russian influence operatives engaging in manufactured amplification of the hashtag?
  7. Another recent media report spotlighted how individuals and entities can purchase fraudulent or fake social media users to artificially raise their profiles online. To what extent have your companies analyzed if and how agents connected to the Russian government’s influence operations have employed this technique to boost Moscow’s disinformation campaigns online? And are you able to verify whether such inauthentic social media accounts bought in bulk were used by Russian-linked influence networks online to promote the #ReleaseTheMemo campaign?
  8. As noted in our previous letter, Kremlin-linked social media accounts amplified WikiLeaks’ offer of $1 million for the misleading, Republican-authored memo. Did your companies specifically analyze the accounts retweeting or sharing WikiLeaks’ request for someone to leak the memo for potential links to Russian social media operatives or online agents?

Given the continued urgency that Congress and the public at large fully understand these matters, we ask that you provide a response to our original questions, as informed by our follow-up requests for additional information, by February 7, 2018.

Sincerely,

Oklahoma Wildlife should become property of Almighty God, Not the State: New Senate Bill

Giovanni Francesco Castiglione, God Creating The Animals, Courtesy Christies Auction House.

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

2nd Session of the 56th Legislature (2018)

SENATE BILL 1457                   By: Dahm (Nathan Dahm)

AS INTRODUCED

An Act relating to wildlife; amending 29 O.S. 2011, Section 7-204, which relates to ownership of wildlife; making all wildlife found in the state property of God; authorizing the management of wildlife according to statutes; and providing an effective date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECTION 1.     AMENDATORY     29 O.S. 2011, Section 7-204, is amended to read as follows:

Section 7-204.  All wildlife found in this state is the property of the state Almighty God.  The people of the State of Oklahoma place the authority to manage all wildlife pursuant to the Oklahoma Legislature.

SECTION 2.  This act shall become effective November 1, 2018.

Link to proposal:

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2017-18%20INT/SB/SB1457%20INT.PDF

Milo’s Berkeley Event: Lawsuit Filed Against Berkeley & Violent Mob of Anarchists

Photo courtesy YouTube UC Berkeley Riots.

Plaintiffs:

JOHN JENNINGS, an individual; KATRINA
REDELSHEIMER, an individual; TREVER
HATCH, an individual; and DONALD
FLETCHER, an individual

Allegations:

1. Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment
(42 U.S.C. § 1983)
2. Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment
(42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Monell)
3. Violation of Ralph Act
(Cal. Civ. Code 51.7 & 52)
4. Violation of Bane Act
(Cal. Civ. Code §§ 52 & 52.1)
5. Civil Battery and Conspiracy
6. Negligence
7. Premises Liability; Negligence
8. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
9. False Imprisonment
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Defendants:

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA; JANET NAPOLITANO, in
her official capacity as President of the
University of California; NICHOLAS B.
DIRKS, individually as former Chancellor of
University of California, Berkeley; CAROL T.
CHRIST, individually and in her official
capacity as Chancellor of University of
California, Berkeley; STEPHEN C. SUTTON,
individually and in his official capacity as
Interim Vice Chancellor of the Student Affairs

Division of University of California, Berkeley;
JOSEPH D. GREENWELL, individually and
in his official capacity as Associate Vice
Chancellor and Dean of Students of University
of California, Berkeley; MARGO BENNETT,
individually and in her official capacity as Chief
of Police of University of California Police
Department, at Berkeley; ALEX YAO,
individually and in his official capacity as
Operations Division Captain of University of
California Police Department, at Berkeley;
LEROY M. HARRIS, individually and in his
official capacity as Patrol Lieutenant of
University of California Police Department, at
Berkeley; IAN DABNEY MILLER, an
individual, RAHA MIRABDAL, a.k.a. SHADI
BANOO, an individual; CITY OF
BERKELEY, a municipal corporation (Berkeley
California); CITY OF BERKELEY POLICE
DEPARTMENT, a municipal subdivision
(Berkeley California); ANDREW R.
GREENWOOD, individually and in his official
capacity as Interim Chief of Police of the City of
Berkeley (Berkeley California); CITY OF
BERKELEY DOES 1-50; UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY DOES 51-100;
and RIOT DOES 101-150.
Defendants.

Full lawsuit includes photo documentation:

https://gallery.mailchimp.com/0579eca0bf695b09b40266abc/files/e5f11be7-76e3-4b99-bc2b-223439636793/complaint.pdf

Introduction to Complaint:

INTRODUCTION
1. This action seeks to protect and vindicate fundamental rights. It is a civil rights action brought under the Fourteenth Amendment against government actors responsible for creating dangerous conditions and exposing the Plaintiffs to physical harm caused by a violent mob of anarchists at a student-sponsored Milo Yiannopolous event (“Yiannopolous event”) scheduled to take place at the University of California, Berkeley (“UC Berkeley” and “University”) on February 1, 2017. Government actors took affirmative measures in preparation for and in response to the riotous mob that left the Plaintiffs in a situation more dangerous than the one in which they found the Plaintiffs.
2. Government actors are responsible for creating and exposing the Plaintiffs to the unlawful actions of an angry mob of violent anarchists by directing law enforcement officers to vacate locations in and around Sproul Plaza and the MLK Center at UC Berkeley, agitating the mob by
issuing feckless disbursal orders and empty threats of arrest from a vantage point where they could ensure their own safety while leaving Plaintiffs exposed to violent assaults, erecting barricades in such
a manner as to enable angry malefactors to surround Plaintiffs and assault them and to deprive Plaintiffs of an exit route, failing to enforce the law and by other affirmative actions. By their failure to intervene or employ reasonable tactical methods to ensure the safety of the Plaintiffs and the public, government actors conducted their official duties with deliberate indifference to the Plaintiffs’ safety, permitting hordes of violent rioters to swarm the university campus in a violent rage. By their failure, government actors are thus responsible for creating and exposing Plaintiffs to known and obvious danger.
3. This action additionally seeks relief from government actors who failed to exercise their duty of care to plan effectively for the foreseeable harms brought upon the Plaintiffs and from the perpetrators of unlawful assaults.

 

Ben Shapiro to Speak at UConn; Intellectual Counter-event to Occur; UConn Bars Public Attendance

UPDATE 1.23.18 UConn has now announced only students can attend. This below article explains that this is not customary–a recent event featuring Anita Hill was free and open to the public:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/01/uconn-bars-public-from-ben-shapiro-speech/


How to watch live:

LIVE TONIGHT: Ben Shapiro Kicks Off 2018 Campus Tour

Ben Shapiro is scheduled to speak at UConn this week, hosted by UConn College Republics.

Event Details Courtesy Facebook:

Come listen to Ben Shapiro lecture about contemporary political issues and then answer questions from the crowd. Ben Shapiro is the voice of the young american conservative movement, this is will be a night of intellectual diversity, that the University of Connecticut has ever seen.

For a refresher, Ben at Berkeley and Ben at University of Utah, Salt Lake City sparked enormously emotional reactions, even accusations of fascism and hate.

Ben Shapiro at Universities: Why Are Students Driven to Seek Counseling?

——————

In a departure from other universities who have loudly protested Ben Shapiro, sometimes requiring a large and expensive security presence,  an “intellectual alternative”  event will be held by UConn College Democrats. Titled “Ben Shapiro is Not as Insightful as He Thinks He Is,” the event recognizes the value of free speech and a free exchange of ideas.

Event Details Courtesy Facebook:

The UConn College Democrats are pleased to host Nathan Robinson this Wednesday, January 24th at 7:00 in the Dodd Center. His talk will be named, “Ben Shapiro Is Not As Insightful As he Thinks He Is.” The talk will be followed by a Q&A.

Nathan Robinson is the editor in chief of Current Affairs, a Yale Law graduate, current Ph.D. student at Harvard, a prolific author and a public defender in New Orleans. He has written extensively on conservative thought and Ben Shapiro’s arguments throughout his career.

The UConn College Democrats are dedicated to free speech and scholarship on campus. Nathan will offer an intellectual alternative to Ben Shapiro. He will dissect the arguments used by campus conservatives and demonstrate that behind the big names of people like Ben Shapiro, there is little of substance to their arguments. We want to strike a balance between the desire for a free exchange of ideas and the desire for the ideas presented to be factually accurate, respectful in their presentation, and grounded in public policy and politics, not baiting people into the culture war. This event will be happening at the same time as Ben Shapiro’s talk, as we hope that this will be a better space for true discussion of the tough topics we face here at UConn and as a nation. We seek for this to be an event that confronts these tough topics while taking a stand against Shapiro and the UConn College Republicans’ attempts to divide our campus rather than unite us.

FREE tickets can be acquired the day of the event from 1-6pm at the Student Union ticket booth. A valid UConn ID is required. Please note that there will be bag restrictions for the talk and that security will be present to ensure an orderly event. We are excited to host Nathan and this campus for a wonderful night of discussion.


Kudos to UConn!